On 22/05/2024 20:39, Péter Ujfalusi wrote:
>
>
> On 22/05/2024 20:07, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 22/05/2024 19:02, Mithil wrote:
>>>> Yep. And testing DTS should clearly show that conversion leads to
>>>> incomplete binding.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I assume the DTS was validated with the binding. Isn't the case here?
>>>>
>>>> Mithil Bavishi,
>>>> Are you sure you tested the DTS?
>>>
>>> dt_binding_check did not give me any errors. Yeah the example is
>>> different from how it is implemented in the kernel ie board specific
>>> (omap4, omap5 etc). Should the example be changed according to that
>>> dtsi then?
>>
>> Binding needs to be adapted to match DTS or DTS has to be fixed to match
>> binding, depending which one is correct.
>
> Normally the DTS is written based on the binding document and the driver
> is written also to follow the binding document.
> However in this case we have a broken/inaccurate binding document and
> the existing DTS files and binaries in wild have deviated (there are
> boards out there using qnx or BSD and use this binding), or to be
> precise the binding document was not updated.
>
> The existing DTS files are the ABI, so we cannot deviate from them,
> unfortunately.
>
> In this case the DTS / driver needs to be reverse engineered to create a
> binding document.
Ah, yes, the third option - ABI should not be broken and sometimes
binding and DTS needs fixes.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
[Index of Archives]
[Pulseaudio]
[Linux Audio Users]
[ALSA Devel]
[Fedora Desktop]
[Fedora SELinux]
[Big List of Linux Books]
[Yosemite News]
[KDE Users]